Last night at “Rolling Conversations,” the inaugural event at Studio 10, Austin Thomas and I had a frank public conversation about pricing artwork. Although artists who show at high-end galleries seem to have no problem talking about their prices and comparing auction results, for emerging artists who don’t sell regularly, assigning specific value to their work is nearly taboo. To get the audience acclimated to this uncomfortable subject (talking about process and ideas is so much more stimulating), I began the conversation by asking everyone to write on a scrap of paper how much they charge for their art work. The prices ranged from $0-12,000, and I suspect if we had asked everyone just to tell us their prices out loud, few people would have participated.

Many artists are reluctant to assign their work a fixed price because prices traditionally fluctuate according to geographic location, wealth of buyer, economic times and other factors. For galleries, prices may be posted, but no one knows how much the galleries actually receive for the work. Discretion and privacy are the galleries’ prevailing practices, but is enshrining secrecy in the best interest of emerging artists? As Thomas pointed out last night, it is accepted that prices for most other commodities fluctuate from year to year, region to region, for largely valid reasons. So why be so coy about art prices in particular?

In fact, fluid, secretive pricing alienates emerging art buyers and even other artists from buying art. We would suggest that artists establish and post prices for their work, as Thomas did recently when she participated in the Elizabeth Foundation Open Studio. Over the course of three days, Thomas sold numerous pieces, mostly to other artists who probably would have been too embarrassed to ask about prices had they not been clearly marked.

Austin’ presented the pricing at her open studio as an art project called Pricing Artwork is Problematic. “An examination of money, Mastercard, and cash&carry travel-ready ideas,” the sign reads.”Everything must go!”

Here’s one of the the many empty spots left on Austin’s wall after visitors bought her collages.

Jason Andrew of Norte Maar and STOREFRONT and Fred Valentine, who recently opened the gallery Valentine in Ridgewood, agree that pricing art work shouldn’t be such a mysterious, unspeakable topic for artists who haven’t begun to sell their work. In an effort to grow the low-end market, Fred has dedicated a small area in the front of his gallery to artwork under five hundred dollars. “I am always looking for items and art for the ‘Gift Shop,” he said. “I take 25% off anything in the gallery under $1,000.00 and this allows the artist to keep the price reasonable but still not feel like they are giving it away.”

Jason, who has worked with numerous emerging artists at both Norte Maar and STOREFRONT, believes that emerging artists routinely overprice their work. He thinks that in establishing a market for their projects, they ought to look at mainly the cost of materials and the time it took to make each piece rather than what other artists are charging, which is usually too high. Getting the work on someone’s wall is preferable to keeping it in storage while waiting for demand to magically materialize on its own.

In this heady time of Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Artworld, and Occupy Museums, artists need to pay due attention to the business side of their own art practices. We need to occupy ourselves. It’s fine to call attention to the exclusionary and unfair practices that are rampant in the art world. But we should also start thinking about how we can help ourselves. Talking openly about how we price our work, though awkward at first, was a good start.

At left, Studio 10 director Larry Greenberg. Thanks, Larry, for opening a new space in Bushwick.

Related articles:

Five galleries in Bushwick you (probably) haven’t been to yet (Hyperallergic)

Two Coats of Paint is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution – Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. To use content beyond the scope of this license, permission is required.

11 thoughts on “A rolling conversation: Pricing artwork”

Nice talking, very clear. That's happening all around the world, i'm an artist from Chile, and those are things that we usually talk with some embarrasement and talking $$$ is always somehow "dirty"… but on the other hand we have to eat and continue making art. I'm totally agreeing with Jason. Lets put prices to our work, but reasonable ones, not gallery ones, which take 40% of the price, or sometimes more.

I would like to know what "clumpism" means. I think artists should always post their prices. If you are showing in a gallery, your POSTED prices should match the gallery prices IF you want to continue showing in that gallery. However, what you work out with individual buyers in your studio is another matter. But you have to TALK to people. Aye–there's the rub! I have given discounts to collectors of my work, or people who buy more than one piece–I also do payment plans. But to do those things, you have to not be afraid to talk about your prices and your willingness to accomodate your collectors (to whatever extent feels right to you)

Here's a comment sent via e-mail. The correspondent prefers to remain anonymous.

Hi Sharon. Thanks for your latest posting. For what it's worth, regarding the pricing of my work. I tend to want to keep things on the lower side. While some gallerists often feel that I've priced myself too low, my feeling is that I'd rather move the work than bring it back to the studio. Once you reach a certain price point, you really can't go back if you want to keep building upon your base of collectors. I think it's very important that prices don't fluctuate. As artists we are not factories which can have "clearance" sales to move last season's merch off the racks. When speaking with other artists, they are the ones who seem to think that my work should be priced higher. My response there is that when I sell everything at the current prices, then I might consider upping the price – not before.For me, the pricing is not an ego boost, as it is with many artists I know – I need to generate the income (been out of work for several years now) without compromising my collectors. Another sticking point that I find with many artists, mostly those who do not have representation, is a resentment for the gallery to take their share of the sale. Usually what I point out is that the gallery is a business, with expenses. When they take the risk of showing your work, they have the expenses whethere there are sales or not. Additionally, when the work is shown it validates and prompts collectors to want it in the first place. Kind of one hand washing the other. I'd rather have 50% of something than 100% of nothing. A whole other topic is the way many artists actively engage in basicially ripping off their galleries…I can't figure out in whose best interest this practice falls into.

Hi Sharon, I was wondering if you had any audio or video from Rolling Conversations ? From what was posted it seems like a great discussion. When I speak with artists, usually young and emerging, whenever money comes up it changes everything. It varies from the reluctant to "whatever people want to give me for my art" to the "I worked 20 hours on that piece so I can command a lot of money". In addition, I have started collecting art (small to medium pieces) and it has been interesting to see the range in prices when inquiring at galleries.

Hi Sharon. Thanks for your latest posting. For what it's worth, regarding the pricing of my work. I tend to want to keep things on the lower side. While some gallerists often feel that I've priced myself too low, my feeling is that I'd rather move the work than bring it back to the studio. Once you reach a certain price point, you really can't go back if you want to keep building upon your base of collectors. I think it's very important that prices don't fluctuate. As artists we are not factories which can have "clearance" sales to move last season's merch off the racks. When speaking with other artists, they are the ones who seem to think that my work should be priced higher. My response there is that when I sell everything at the current prices, then I might consider upping the price – not before. For me, the pricing is not an ego boost, as it is with many artists I know – I need to generate the income (been out of work for several years now) without compromising my collectors. Another sticking point that I find with many artists, mostly those who do not have representation, is a resentment for the gallery to take their share of the sale. Usually what I point out is that the gallery is a business, with expenses. When they take the risk of showing your work, they have the expenses whethere there are sales or not. Additionally, when the work is shown it validates and prompts collectors to want it in the first place. Kind of one hand washing the other. I'd rather have 50% of something than 100% of nothing. A whole other topic is the way many artists actively engage in basicially ripping off their galleries…I can't figure out in whose best interest this practice falls into.

Hi Sharon. Thanks for your latest posting. For what it's worth, regarding the pricing of my work. I tend to want to keep things on the lower side. While some gallerists often feel that I've priced myself too low, my feeling is that I'd rather move the work than bring it back to the studio. Once you reach a certain price point, you really can't go back if you want to keep building upon your base of collectors. I think it's very important that prices don't fluctuate. As artists we are not factories which can have "clearance" sales to move last season's merch off the racks. When speaking with other artists, they are the ones who seem to think that my work should be priced higher. My response there is that when I sell everything at the current prices, then I might consider upping the price – not before. For me, the pricing is not an ego boost, as it is with many artists I know – I need to generate the income (been out of work for several years now) without compromising my collectors. Another sticking point that I find with many artists, mostly those who do not have representation, is a resentment for the gallery to take their share of the sale. Usually what I point out is that the gallery is a business, with expenses. When they take the risk of showing your work, they have the expenses whethere there are sales or not. Additionally, when the work is shown it validates and prompts collectors to want it in the first place. Kind of one hand washing the other. I'd rather have 50% of something than 100% of nothing. A whole other topic is the way many artists actively engage in basicially ripping off their galleries…I can't figure out in whose best interest this practice falls into.

This is so interesting to me. this past few months I have decided to post prices on every piece I upload to my website and to start a "sales page" online for my small works. For years I thought it was anathema to art to relate it to money, after all I'm not doing it for the money. But, at the same time, I want to sell my paintings.

It's a false dichotomy. Money does not taint art, people who only understand art in relation to money do.

It’s also important to protect your investment!! Having your artwork authenticated by professionals is an incredibly important step if you want to be successful in the art market. If you need any help on this please visit http://www.monetexperts.com. Have a great day!

Post navigation

Connect With Us

Karen Pence is a painter
Yes, Indiana's First Lady Karen Pence likes to paint. Pence told the Indy Star that she studied art at Butler, where she majored in teaching and minored in art. "I ...

Two Coats Selected Gallery Guide / March 2018
Contributed by Sharon Butler / In case readers want to check out some painting shows but aren’t interested in racing around to the art fairs (or paying the entry fees), here are some gallery shows ...

Images: The Independent Art Fair, 2018
This year the Independent Art Fair showed a slew of conventionally good paintings, which is not necessarily de rigueur for the enterprise that prides itself on being the most “edgy” and “risk-taking” of the New ...

Quick study
This edition of “Quick study” includes good news about how the arts drive economic growth and bad news about MoCA curator Helen Molesworth. Also: Grant Wood’s retrospective at the Whitney, Russian collectors' hankering to join in the ...

The Casualist tendency
This essay, which builds upon an essay about contemporary abstract painting that I wrote for The Brooklyn Rail in 2011, was just published in the January/February 2014 issue of Christie's ...

These threads are queer“Let the threads be articulate.” – Anni Albers
Guest Contributor Clarity Haynes / The wall text at the portal to the exhibition "Queer Threads," currently at the Leslie-Lohman Museum in ...

Report from Berlin: Judith Hopf’s idiosyncratic vision
Contributed by Loren Britton / Berlin-based artist Judith Hopf, known for idiosyncratic combinations, is invested in post-painting practices coming out of Fluxus conversations between George Brecht and Allan Kaprow. In her sculpture show ...

Michelle Grabner and Brad Killam: About a painting
Brad Killam and his wife, artist-writer-educator-curator Michelle Grabner, transcribed the following conversation they had about Airport (2015), one of the terrific small-scale paintings that is included in Killam’s solo at Geary Contemporary. The exhibition, on view through March 17 ...

Subscribe VIA Email

Sharing content

Two Coats of Paint is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - Noncommercial - No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Contact Sharon Butler via email for permission to use content beyond the scope of this license.